By @nise_yoshimi. What a 🔥 summary of modern Anglo capitalism.
So much of the US' modern politics and problems, both domestic and foreign, are downstream of its reliance on finance and immigration to fuel the capitalist beast at home, and dominate and subvert the world abroad.
I think there is a direct line the from post-1965 INA to modern US identity controversies (eg wokeness).
The US was almost 90% white as late as the ‘70s, with blacks as the US’ literal only minority.
Non-Western migrants were essentially non-existent until 1965, small sprinklings of say, Mexicans or Japanese aside.
And the US essentially had no large scale inward immigration for large parts of its history like 1925-1965.
The narrative itself of the US as a ‘nation of immigrants’ is not historically true, from this perspective.
Moreover, even the US immigration relationship with the rest of the world since then has led to devastating brain drain abroad, and increased social fracturing at home.
What I think is happening in the US is that what is fundamentally a country founded as a WASP homeland is undergoing a fight for its soul as a result of these demographic changes causes by immigration.
And the US economy, now so utterly dependent on new immigrants to keep growing its productivity, is working at cross-purposes with having a harmonious and genuinely united social identity and order here domestically.
All the while, the US jealously hordes and protects its technology economy advantage, squashing any would be competitors.
One of the most powerful interpretations of the Cold War was that it was a US attempt to prevent any autonomous centers of economic power from forming.
Hence its containment of the Soviet Union and strangulation of 1980s-90s Japan.
Now though, the contradictions and saved-up problems of this Anglo capitalism model have come home to roost.
* Manufacturing is now in China.
* Denial of tech to China has planted the seeds for future evisceration of the US tech industry as the PRC pursues self reliance.
* The hamster on a treadmill reliance on infinite immigration has created explosive social fissures domestically.
* The PRC has engaged in iterative learning, and is now so integrated into the global economy, and retains enough of its own sovereignty, that it can’t be contained or coerced like the 1980s USSR or JPN
This is the ultimate problem for the US.
It is these historical processes that are driving China’s rise and a relative US decline.
Not because China now has more attack submarines or better guided bombs now than in the past or whatever.
Wow. I feel like I could write an entire essay on this.
She’s replying to a news story about China, but honestly, I hope you can see why the US spent so much time promoting women’s rights and new gender identities to Afghans: there is a huge Western elite constituency that demands the normalization of these New Age type ideologies.
She seems to be saying that Xi Jinping should be a Western liberal and encourage the boy to instead wear dresses and be a girl. And the girl should be lesbian.
I was a strong supporter of gay rights and marriage beginning all the way back in the early/mid 2000’s when it was somewhat unpopular to do so, but honestly, the sanctification of non-trad life by the New Age Western world is so cringe.
This goes to my point the other day about how PRC diplomats understand US foreign policy better than USG officials themselves, who stutter and babble when asked to explain a specific policy, especially as it relates to TW.
The fact that OP and the commentators in the comments and retweets are taking this seriously just shows you how little even Americans understand their own nation's political processes and dynamics.
No wonder they get surprised so often.
The USG just clarified. I was right.
I should honestly charge for my sage analysis. A one man political consultancy.
On 9/21/01, Afghan senior clerics recommended to the Afghan Taliban government under Mohammed Omar, that they should tell UBL to leave Afghanistan for his role in planning 9/11.
They offered condolences, too, for the victims of 9/11.
The Taliban government ignored the advice and played dumb, beating around the bush and refusing to hand UBL over immediately to the US.
The rest, as the saying goes, is history.
This is the first time I’m learning about this.
I think contrition and a handover of UBL by the Taliban, if they had chosen to give it, would still not have been enough to satisfy America’s desire for revenge.
Now that I think about it, I think Bill Bishop’s Sinocism newsletter has done real damage towards the goal of understanding China in the Xi era.
Telling everyone that he was a hardcore communist misled people to thinking he was an actual economic communist.
Moreover, the constant re-statements of ‘totalitarian Xi, liberal Hu’ dichotomy do not track with reality on the ground, public sentiment, or socioeconomic indicators, which are better now in the Xi era due to additional economic growth over the Hu era.
In short, I think he overemphasized what a break the Xi era has been from its predecessors.
Just a reminder to not take someone at face value just because they have a distinguished brand.